via Mike Shedlock
One of the claims on TikTok is that it might try to spread false news, or influence the election, like what Senate Majority leader Chuck Schumer just did to Israel, and Biden did regarding Covid.
False Information and Information Suppression
Recall Hillary’s nonsense that Russia cost her the elections in 2016. The media was OK with that. Media also suppressed all the facts on the Hunter Biden laptop.
The EU banned the website Russia Today (RT) on grounds it was spreading propaganda. The US wants to do the same.
Radio Free Europe reports Two Years Into EU Ban, Russia’s RT And Sputnik Are Still Accessible Across The EU
Biden Officials, CDC Pressured Social Media Giants
Please note that on September 8, 2023, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Finds Biden Officials, CDC Pressured Social Media Giants.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that President Joe Biden’s White House and the Centers for Disease Control likely violated the Constitution’s First Amendment by asking social media companies to crack down on misinformation about COVID-19.
The Supreme Court took questions on that case today.
Supreme Court Voices Skepticism of Censorship Claims Against Government according to the Wall Street Journal.
The Supreme Court appeared doubtful Monday of claims that the government violated the Constitution when it urged social-media platforms to remove misleading posts about Covid-19 and other public safety risks, absent some threat of official retribution.
The Republican attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, along with several individuals who complained that online platforms suppressed their antivaccine views at the government’s request, filed the First Amendment suit in 2022. Lower courts have largely sided with the plaintiffs, but the high court during oral arguments on Monday voiced more sympathy with the Biden administration’s defense.
Liberal justices questioned whether any plaintiffs suffered harms that gave them a right to sue. And justices across the spectrum expressed skepticism that the government’s interactions with the platforms, even if heated, amounted to official restraint.
“It’s probably not uncommon for government officials to protest an upcoming story on surveillance or detention policy and say, ‘If you run that, it’s going to harm the war effort and put Americans at risk,’” said Kavanaugh, who served in the George W. Bush White House when surveillance and detention policies were front-page news.
Warning, Free Speech Could Lead to People Speaking Freely
Appropriately, The Babylon Bee reports Ketanji Brown Jackson Warns Right To Free Speech Could Lead To People Speaking Freely
What’s The TikTok Ban Really About?
The US claims it’s a security measure aimed at China specifically. Why all the other garbage in the bill then?
What’s Else Is in the Bill?
Hey, let’s enshrine Biden’s defense of pressuring media into law and let President [Biden or Trump] take your pick, determine what websites to ban.
The Bill would set a new and more dangerous precedent for the US Government in regarding to cracking down on Tech Companies and Online Content.
— Anomie Phoenix #StayFree (@AnomiePhoenix) March 12, 2024
Et Tu, Scott Adams?
Even Dilbert writer Scott Adams is in on the nonsense.
TikTok defended against charges it could influence American politics by instantly persuading its users to flood Congress with calls. . . thus proving the necessity of the ban. https://t.co/TSnc4HGKE4
— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) March 17, 2024
Check out his Adams’ amazingly silly idea that protesting the ban is proof that the ban is needed.
Similarly, protests against the Vietnam War were proof that the war needed to go on.
Dangerous Precedent
“The Bill would set a new and more dangerous precedent for the US Government in regarding to cracking down on Tech Companies and Online Content.”
A friend of mine supports the bill. He claims “China does it too“.
Is the US supposed to sink to the lowest common denominator based on playground logic, “But mom, Susie did it too.“?
Curiously, the bill passed 352 to 65. Both sides must be hoping their guy is the next president so they can set the social media agenda for the next four years.
I side with the extremely odd group of AOC, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Rand Paul, and Elon Musk who is against the bill.
I’m Putting Together a Group to Buy TikTok, Details Coming
The TikTok ban has nothing to do with a very narrow focus about yelling “fire” in a theater as my friend claims.
This is about a very broad brush push against free speech. It’s also marching down a political path that will let the president define what websites to ban and what political agendas are allowed.
The bill would legitimize political pressure from the White House on national security grounds (think Covid) even if that is not the stated intent.
That was the point I was making in my March 17, post I’m Putting Together a Group to Buy TikTok, Details Coming
It’s obvious, but few see. Some do see it, but expect their party to be the one that will set the rules.
Meanwhile, the US constantly moans about election interference when the US is the biggest violator and hypocrite in the whole world.
We can’t let anyone do to us what we do to others. We can yell fire, and only the winner [Biden or Trump] gets to decide when.
As the Babylon Bee warns “Free Speech Could Lead to People Speaking Freely.”
We can’t have that because who knows what Russia or China might say.